Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 581

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Waning Protection after Fifth Dose of Acellular Pertussis Vaccine in Children

Open access
Klein, Nicola P., Bartlett, Joan, Rowhani-Rahbar, Ali, Fireman, Bruce, Baxter, Roger·2012·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the United States, children receive five doses of diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP) vaccine before 7 years of age. The duration of protection after five doses of DTaP is unknown. METHODS: We assessed the risk of pertussis in children in California relative to the time since the fifth dose of DTaP from 2006 to 2011. This period included a large outbreak in 2010. We conducted a case-control study involving members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California who were vaccinated with DTaP at 47 to 84 months of age. We compared children with pertussis confirmed by a positive polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay with two sets of controls: those who were PCR-negative for pertussis and closely matched controls from the general population of health-plan members. We used logistic regression to examine the risk of pertussis in relation to the duration of time since the fifth DTaP dose. Children who received whole-cell pertussis vaccine during infancy or who received any pertussis-containing vaccine after their fifth dose of DTaP were excluded. RESULTS: We compared 277 children, 4 to 12 years of age, who were PCR-positive for pertussis with 3318 PCR-negative controls and 6086 matched controls. PCR-positive children were more likely to have received the fifth DTaP dose earlier than PCR-negative controls (P<0.001) or matched controls (P=0.005). Comparison with PCR-negative controls yielded an odds ratio of 1.42 (95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 1.66), indicating that after the fifth dose of DTaP, the odds of acquiring pertussis increased by an average of 42% per year. CONCLUSIONS: Protection against pertussis waned during the 5 years after the fifth dose of DTaP. (Funded by Kaiser Permanente).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1200850

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 581

Metadata

Authors
Klein, N. P., Bartlett, J., Rowhani-Rahbar, A., Fireman, B., & Baxter, R.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2012-09-13
Volume
367
Issue
11
Pages
1012-1019
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2158985300
Cited by
581
References
0
FWCI
52.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Waning Protection after Fifth Dose of Acellular Pertussis Vaccine in Children. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1200850
The paper
Klein, N. P., Bartlett, J., Rowhani-Rahbar, A., Fireman, B., & Baxter, R. (2012). Waning Protection after Fifth Dose of Acellular Pertussis Vaccine in Children. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1200850

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.